Super PACs' new playground: 2012

First came American Crossroads, Commonsense Ten and their ilk — so-called super PACs set up with unlimited cash that poured millions of dollars into ads benefiting multiple candidates and attacking their opponents.

Now comes the next generation of this new breed of fundraising committees — super PACs created to boost individual presidential candidates, and to strip the bark off their rivals.

Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

They’re already showing signs that they could reshape the presidential campaign landscape in 2012.

A super PAC created to advance Mitt Romney’s campaign for the GOP nomination raised $12.2 million in the first half of the year. One set up to help President Barack Obama spent $97,000 on ads attacking Romney. Supporters of Texas Rep. Ron Paul’s dark horse Republican bid are using a super PAC to pay for $6,000 worth of billboards and print ads ahead of the Ames straw poll. And one of the half-dozen super PACs established to bolster Texas Gov. Rick Perry in his yet-to-be-declared campaign for the GOP nomination is airing ads in Iowa calling him “a better option for president.”

“You can be sure that we haven’t seen the last of these things, whether it’s this cycle or some future cycle, unless the legal climate changes,” said Michael Malbin, executive director of the Campaign Finance Institute, a non-profit, non-partisan group that tracks political fundraising data and trends. “You can’t expect candidates not to take advantage of something like this when their opponents are.”

The creation of super PACs as political advertising vehicles is an outgrowth of the Supreme Court’s pivotal 2010 ruling, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited cash on campaign ads.

The new crop of candidate-specific super PACs allow deep-pocketed individuals, corporations and unions to write checks far exceeding the maximum amount they can give directly to their preferred candidate ($2,500 per person per election) to groups often run by operatives closely allied with the candidate. The super PACs are legally barred from giving directly to — or coordinating their spending with — their favored candidate. That can curb their effectiveness but also frees the operatives running them to air attack ads and deploy other, far more aggressive tactics than the candidate would want to use.

But the groups also carry risks for the candidates they aim to help. That’s particularly true if the candidates lend their imprimatur to the committees. There’s also potential for friendly fire, which is manifesting itself in a competition to be the super PAC supporting Perry, who is expected to declare his candidacy Saturday. It could hurt both the operatives behind the groups and their favored candidates if the committees get too aggressive with one another or rival candidates, or if they’re accused of playing fast and loose with campaign rules or accepting controversial donations.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, got a taste of super PAC backlash late last week, after NBC News reported that a super PAC to which he has close ties, Restore Our Future, accepted $1 million from a company apparently established exclusively to funnel the contribution.

POLITICO subsequently revealed that the source of the cash was a former business associate and longtime political donor to Romney, who declared Monday that “the whole controversy with regards to his contribution sorta disappears when he came forward and said that he was the contributor. … And any issues with regards to his contribution should be directed to him and to the people [running] the PAC.”

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, got a taste of super PAC backlash late last week, after NBC News reported that a super PAC to which he has close ties, Restore Our Future, accepted $1 million from a company apparently established exclusively to funnel the contribution.

yeah.................backlash for a liberal/progressive so-called "news" organization............NBC........ is NBC and the rest of the MSM wolfpack press "combing" through Barack Obama's donations too ? I doubt it.....

What you have are the enablers of the Obama Administration, the wolfpack, trying to determine who is donating to Romney and they bully them..............make them names public and to intiminate them........

Everyone saw the campaign the MSM wolfpack press launched against the Koch Brothers.................

If the Democrat Party and their radical liberal/progressive Ideologues put as much effort into creating Jobs and balancing the Federal budget they could win elections and power the old fashion way............................EARN IT.........

But everyone knows we are dealing with a Hate N Divide political party.......................which is a sad FACT

The Supreme Court decision opened the floodgates to huge, anonymous sums of money (and untold corruption) influencing our elections. PACs have given birth to Super PACS and Super PACs have given birth to tailor-made, candidate Super PACs (and there is no end in sight for this birthing chain). The Supreme Court has, in effect, destroyed campaign finance laws -- pretty much all of them. Republican senate "leader" McConnell has effectively blocked President Obama's commission nominees, which means the commission doesn't even have a quorum and is a watchdog with no teeth. PACs will proliferate, if for no other reason than many political losers, like Norm Coleman and Christine O'Donnell have, will rush to create PACs and become PAC parasites (a new breed of parasites). It's a cushy income and big expense account with little to no work. The PACs also will be coordinated with campaigns, even though it's against the law. What's the toothless FEC going to do (two years from now when they get around to deciding an issue)?

I want to see a couple of Hollywood PACs formed: one for President Obama and one against the new-school Republicans. There is a lot of artistic brilliance in Hollywood (as well as big money to fund them) and Hollywood needs to put its energy and talent where its mouth and money are. This is the year for epic ads! It would catch on as a separate cultural game to try to guess which ad was directed by Spielberg, Allen, Scorsese, Lee, Redford, Soderbergh, Almodovar, or the Coen brothers. The best anti-Republican ad would probably be won by a Lynch or Cronenberg or Tarantino -- that is, someone who understands the truly grotesque.

You spent the first paragraph talking against these PAC's and Super PAC's. Now you want one formed. One, of course, that supports your candidate and your party. Come Roameo, I was with you. Stick to your principles bro! This is how this crap takes over our system. One guy does it, so then the other guys says well if he's going to do it then so am I. Next thing you now, everybodies doing it. We need to keep screaming at them "NO, DON'T DO IT".

The Repubs are always saying that it's the small, independent businesses are the one creating jobs. If so, why are they sitting on allthis cash and refusing to spend it?

lol....................it sure be very clear by now.........................Barack Obama IS the reason.......

No leadership and when there are "ideas" they are typically liberal/progressive concepts and America is a Conservative nation that likes Conservative concepts and principles.

That's the reason for all the unrest in America today.........

It's all about "policies"............

In 2012 hopefully we elect a new president that is "right-of-center" and one that is respected smart and has a proven record, for me its clearly Romney.....................25 years in the private sector..................4 years as a politician............not an Ideologue just a commonsense level headed proven Fiscal Conservative..........

The Repubs are always saying that it's the small, independent businesses are the one creating jobs. If so, why are they sitting on allthis cash and refusing to spend it?

It’s refreshing to hear someone admit that they do not understand basic economics. Take a couple business courses or start a business and you will quickly understand their reluctance. Here is a hint: Private companies are not social service agencies.

how do you muster up so much hate and venom so early in the morning. I just saw a video this morning that asked what would happen if among other things we put down all the name calling, finger pointing and put half the effort in to fixing what's broken in the country as we spend trying to have the president out, what would happen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

We complain about the way people in washington behave, but really they only behave how we encourage them to. Look at how we talk to each other at 6 in the morning for free. What do you exspect them to do for millions of dollars? AFTER ALL THEY ARE CALLED REPRESENTATIVES FOR A REASON. step away from your faceless, fearless blog for a moment and contribute a constructive verse to the real world.

POLITICO subsequently revealed that the source of the cash was a former business associate and longtime political donor to Romney

But did you research the names of the 100 fat cats who gave super-rich Baby Barry a birthday president of $3,580,000 without having their names and occupations made public? Aren’t you the least bit curious, Kenneth?

Superpacs are free speech. It's that simple. Before the Supreme Court decision the only companies that could give limitless to a candidate were media companies kind of like Politico's bias. Mainstream media is going the way of the dinasours.